Essential Research: 53-47 to Coalition

The first polling conducted since the Prime Minister's polarising parliamentary speech on sexism and misogyny finds both leaders with their highest strongly approve ratings in well over a year. On voting intention however, the Coalition maintains its solid lead.

Share

This week’s Essential Research survey has Labor down a point on the primary vote to 36%, but is otherwise unchanged on last week: the Coalition on 47%, the Greens on 9% and the Coalition leading 53-47 on two-party preferred. With very good timing, it also offers us Essential’s monthly personal ratings, which unlike the voting intention figures are derived entirely from the most recent period of surveying from Wednesday to Sunday. These figures are also of particular interest in the current environment in that they involve a four (strong approval, approval, disapproval, strong disapproval) rather than two point scale. This finds Julia Gillard gaining two points on strong approval since last month to 9%, her best result since February 2011, while also gaining four points on the milder approval measure to 32%. Her combined approval rating of 41% is her highest since May 2011. Her combined disapproval rating is down three points to 51%, also her best since last May, with strong disapproval steady at 27% and the milder disapproval rating down three to 24%. Opinion of Tony Abbott would appear to have polarised even further: he is up three on strong approval to 9%  his best result since December 2010  but also up two on strong disapproval to a new high of 31%. His overall approval is up five to 37%, and disapproval down one to 54%. Gillard has opened up a seven-point lead as preferred prime minister of 43-36, its highest since February.

The survey also gauges attitudes to the presidential election, finding Barack Obama favoured by 63% to just 9% for Mitt Romney, with Obama leading 53-18 even among Coalition voters. Respondents were found to have an overwhelmingly more favourable view of their own country than the United States with respect to access to health care and jobs, standard of living for ordinary people, and other such. The US obviously rated higher on international influence, but even here 17% felt able to conclude Australia’s was better. Respondents were also asked about climate change, with much the same result as when the question was last asked a year ago: 48% believe climate change is occurring as a result of human activity, with 39% plumping for we are witnessing a normal fluctuation in the earth’s climate.

Agreed. Although the “emotional states” sails pretty close to the wind due to the allusion, looking at the images, it’s clear that Feeney isn’t trading on “women as emotional” — quite the opposite — he’s asserting that she’s suffering from the opposite condition — want of emotion.

So on review I’m giving him a pass on “sexism”. He does get “juvenile”, “gratuitously disrespectful”. I hitherto had no strong impression of him, but whatever impression I had has worsened.

From The Australian.
[FAIR Work Australia has laid charges against independent MP Craig Thomson, alleging he broke industrial laws and union rules in splurging hundreds of thousands dollars of union funds on prostitutes, spousal travel, and high living.]
I thought we’d already trawled through all this stuff and found some of it pretty shonky.

[Unless sexism is in the eye of the beholder, either yourself or Ms Milne is wRONg on Mr Feeney’s efforts.]

I imagine sexism can be in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes there are subtle things that a third party might miss. In this case I don’t agree that Milne is entitled to cite Feeney’s tweet pics as sexist. Stupid? Sure. But sexist? Nope.

Now that official proceedings have commenced, the Coalition can no longer comment on the proceedings without prejudicing the case

Maybe they’ll be able to dig up a text from him saying he doesn’t like horses or something, and the Coalition can demand his removal from Parliament on the basis of cruelty to animals. Abbott patted a horse once, so he should be above suspicion.

Schnappi –
Hmmm. Being declared a bankrupt is just as much a disqualification from being an MP as being jailed so I’m not quite sure of the logic there.

If it’s just about the fact that it might take longer for the civil suit to get to the point of awarding damages, and then for bankruptcy proceedings to complete then perhaps there’s a point there, but I suspect it’s all irrelevant – if Craig Thomson is not resigning from his seat, and there’s no reason to believe he would at this point, then whatever proceedings will drag on long enough that a by-election won’t be possible before the next election.

As we’ve been saying here forever. Whatever threat action against Thomson might be to the government, it isn’t based on numbers in the house, it would just be about the political impact of the grubbiness surrounding the HSU and Thomson.